Cited by 64SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness in preventing confirmed infection in pregnant women

Open access
Butt, Adeel A., Chemaitelly, Hiam, Al Khal, Abdullatif, Coyle, Peter V., Saleh, Huda, Kaleeckal, Anvar H., Latif, Ali Nizar, Bertollini, Roberto +2 more·2021·Journal of Clinical Investigation

Abstract

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with a higher risk of pregnancy-related complications and neonatal respiratory distress and hospitalization. Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in pregnant women is not known.MethodsAll women with confirmed pregnancy who presented to the national referral hospital in Qatar between December 20, 2020, and May 30, 2021, with at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 test and not testing prior to pregnancy were included. We determined the vaccine effectiveness of mRNA vaccines in preventing confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy using both cohort and test-negative case-control designs. Analyses were adjusted for age group, nationality, and gestational age.ResultsAmong 4534 pregnant women, there were 407 vaccinated and 407 unvaccinated women in the matched cohort analysis. Vaccine effectiveness was 87.6% (95%CI 44.1%-97.2%) at least 14 days after the second dose. There were 386 test-positive and 834 matched women in the test-negative case control analysis. Vaccine effectiveness was 86.8% (95%CI 47.5%-98.5%) at least 14 days after the second dose. Adjustment for age, nationality, and gestational age yielded similar results for both designs. In the test-negative analysis, vaccine effectiveness at least 14 days after the first dose but before the second dose was 40.8% (95% CI 0.0%-80.4%). Of the 386 test-positive pregnant women, 74 cases were Alpha variant, 163 cases were Beta variant, and 156 cases were variants of unknown status. The…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1172/jci153662

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Effectiveness was assessed with a test-negative case-control design rather than a cohort design, but an earlier cohort study in the same population yielded similar findings.

    “Effectiveness was assessed with the use of an observational, test-negative, case–control design rather than a design in which cohorts of individual persons were followed up. However, the cohort study design applied earlier to the same population yielded findings similar to those of the test-negative design.14,15,31”
  • The cohort study design applied earlier to the same population of Qatar yielded findings similar to those of the test-negative case-control design, supporting the validity of this standard approach in assessing vaccine effectiveness.

    “However, the cohort study design applied earlier to the same population of Qatar yielded findings similar to those of the test-negative case–control design36,38,39, supporting the validity of this standard approach in assessing vaccine effectiveness11,12,36,40.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Butt, A. A., Chemaitelly, H., Al Khal, A., Coyle, P. V., Saleh, H., Kaleeckal, A. H., Latif, A. N., Bertollini, R., Abou-Samra, A.-B., & Abu-Raddad, L. J.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • Hamad Medical Corporation (QA)
  • Ministry of Public Health (QA)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Investigation
Published
2021-12-01
Volume
131
Issue
23
ISSN
  • 0021-9738 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-8238
OpenAlex
W3203370784
Cited by
64
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 3
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Investigation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
None (N/A)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › COVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, pregnant women, mRNA vaccines, COVID-19 prevention, test-negative case-control design, cohort analysis, SARS-CoV-2 variants, Alpha variant, Beta variant, maternal immunization
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Vaccines, mRNA Vaccines, Adult, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Infectious, Vaccination, Vaccines, Synthetic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review